Search This Blog

Prisoners

A riveting, engaging 153 minutes crime drama with career best performances by both Hugh Jackman and Jake Gyllenhaal. Director Denis Villeneuve and writer Aaron Guzikowski have given us a very well and tightly written crime drama (not thriller, per se, as this is very much a drama) that weaves red herrings, drops seemingly unimportant plot points and stretch the unwavering tension throughout in a well-paced (slow to some, no doubt, who prefers the usual Hollywood fare) and intelligent manner. Of course, all this is for nought, if there was not the very strong cast that Villeneuve has assembled. Jackman, in a role that is more deserving of an Academy Award nomination than Jean Valjean, has the more showy role and he was brilliant. He is the character that you hate yourself for sympathising with, an anti-hero due to circumstances; his choices conflict with his morality and Jackman aptly displayed the emotions and pain that such decisions has caused him. For a while, you can finally lose the Wolverine in him. However, he still had moments where he was just shouting the lines. Gyllenhaal, on the other hand, got the more introspective role. But that does not mean that he was not outstanding. He got into the character so fully, that you don't see Gyllenhaal (although there are times where it was reminiscence of "Zodiac", although that could be blamed on a similar subject matter confusing the roles). He is the hero that you want to succeed, but the obstacles in his pass just bring out his frustrations and his innate fear of failing. Failing himself, and the failing the victims. Gyllenhaal brought all that out. The supporting cast was top-notch too in particular the ever brilliant Viola Davis, the chameleon-like Melissa Leo and Paul Dano who has gotten himself a niche role in indie productions but was sympathetically wonderful here. Terence Howard and Maria Bello round out the rest of the cast, but their roles were not written as strongly. Kudos goes out to Rogers A. Deakins again for framing such beautiful cinematography, and to Johann Johannsson for an effective score especially the cellos and the strings to notch up the tension. However, most praises must be lavished on director Villeneuve for creating a riveting drama, and Guzikowski for writing a thoroughly engaging and intelligent crime fiction. Except for the last scene, which seemed a bit too neat after all that had happened before that.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

This was such a beautiful film. An elegantly directed love story/fairy tale by Guillermo del Toro that was bursting with extraordinary vision and sumptuous details, and lovingly buffeted with a gorgeous score by Alexandre Desplat. Sally Hawkins was simply divine and enchanting in a (mostly) silent role. And Michael Shannon was a truly terrifying villain. This film not only celebrated Love, but was also a beautiful (yes, that word again) homage to the golden age of cinema/films. Del Toro had a vision and he executed it beautifully without sacrificing his aesthetics or storytelling.

The Shape of Water was a culmination of many creative forces and it truly deserved all its 13 nominations at the 90th Academy Awards. The standouts definitely included production design, cinematography and original score, with Desplat having a strong chance of getting the gold. Desplat's score was so beautiful - romantic yet with a tinge of whimsiness that carried the theme of the film so well. And the l…

Well, that was...over. Avengers: Infinity War was a fun film but it was not necessarily the best film in the MCU. However, kudos to the Russo brothers for carrying it off and delivering a superhero / Marvel film that serviced the fans and was also a good summer/popcorn tentpole blockbuster. With such a large cast, they did actually manage to give the fan/crowd favourites the most screen time but yet not neglect the others.

Sure, they were a couple of scenes where logic fails (which was to be expected) and some moments that dragged on longer than necessary (inevitable with a 149 minutes runtime), however, one important aspect that A:IW had was an emotional weight that held the narrative together. The story had consequences. There was a cost and heroes do die, although the Russo brothers - and Kevin Feige - could have been more cruel and brutal, and also creatively braver. Maybe in the sequel.

Speaking of which, for once - and possibly due to the pending sequel - the MCU has developed …

For all its humour and meta self-referentials which entertained and brought the laughs, this Ryan Reynolds-fronted sequel lacked the spark of originality which made the first movie such a breath of fresh air in this superhero-saturated landscape. This was expected - and inevitable - with most sequels but this film really over-compensated its weak plot, lack of characterisation, and honestly, poor action sequences/CGI, with a constant barrage of sight gags and running jokes. It all got too thin and tiresome after the first act and glaringly too reliant on (or obsessed with?) Reynolds to the detrimental sidelining of proper storytelling (or movie spectacle). But, hey, at least they got Celine to help riff-off Bond. The problem with non-Marvel produced Marvel franchises (especially Fox-produced ones) is that without Kevin Feige they do not understand, or know, what their fans (and fanboys and fangirls) want. Instead, they focused on the character without the respect to the complicated his…